Toyota Ist 2003

Am trying to find out what fuel this vehicle should be running on & also how many kms per litre of fuel it should be doing.
Was told to use Ultimate fuel by car salesman, but seem to be going through the fuel too quickly.
Thanks in anticipation

How many l/100km are you getting and what sort of running are you doing!
i.e all city, all country, mixed, mostly short runs etc.

What year and engine size does it have!

Is it a 2WD or 4WD one!

Its highly unlikely that you will use less fuel running a lower octane.

In general, small Toyota Automatics are not as economical as dealers and the like make them out to be. They may seem economical if you have only ever owned bigger also inefficient Toyota's but that's about it.

This is because they don't take advantage of most of the fuel saving technology that is available (efficient transmissions, electric power steering, advanced aerodynamic techniques etc). Plus models that do havetheir attempt at economical direct injection engine technology are shunned by most as unreliable (which is justified IMO). I suspect the reluctance is due to costs and also because they wouldn't want the economy of their regular vehicles to be to close to that of their hybrids.

That and any extra technology is likely to tip the balance and extinguish the slight reliability advantage which they rely on to sell their vehicles. This is especially important as they are not known for the reliable implementation of new technology in cheap to mid priced models.

As specified it is 2003. Engine capacity 1298.Not sure what you mean by 1/1000km & think it would be a 2WD ! (70 year old females don't know these things!) The "Energywise " fuel rating paper that came with it says Fuel Economy $1,710 cost per year, based on price per ltr of $2.00 & an average distance 0f 14,000km.
My travel is mixed but mostly short distances. Many thanks

91 is fine. You may get better economy from 95& 98 though.
Short urban trips do not help economy though, lots of inefficient cold running.

How much km does a full tank of fuel get you! Is there any big hills or lots of passengers on your journey! Has the car been serviced with good quality oil! What is your driving like! ie nana driving or heavy footed!

O.K those energywise star ratings are pretty useless because the don't give you any actual numbers, I think you can muck about and find them but its a silly system.

Those first generation 1st's like yours are all 2WD and 4 speed auto.

To get any real idea of what your fuel economy actually is you need to fill the car right up, write down the milage on the odometer or set the trip meter then do the same when you fill it up next time. Write down how many litres of fuel it takes to fill it back up again.

I suggest you do that then come back with the numbers and we can help you work out what actual fuel economy you are getting and whether its worse than it should be.

Short runs with a 4 speed automatic 1.3 Toyota are always going to be fairly thirsty for a small car and you will use a lot more fuel than the energy start rating suggests, given that is based on longer mixed running.

Best of luck with it all.

Oh and l/100km is the normal standard for measuring fuel economy, or the modern equivalent of "miles per gallon" which you have likely heard of.

What it means is how many litres of fuel it takes to do 100km. That's the figure we can work out by recording the milage you do and the amount of fuel you have used to do that milage as explained above.

As an educated guess without looking up the figures for your car I would say for short running like you are doing I wouldn't be surprised if you are using 8 or 9 litres per 100km.

I would not be in a rush to use lower octane fuel, its highly unlikely that you would save any money given you only need to get slightly better economy from the higher octane fuel to cover the extra cost. That said, the basic 1.3 litre Toyota engine should be quite happy running on 91.

Many thanks for all your comments.
I have worked it out & it seems to be doing 9.75kms per litre which is equivalentto approx. 15.69 miles to the gallon. Not very good eh ! Haven't had car long so maybe a good tune-up may help it a bit,.
TRBZR - I am a nana driver, but also heavy footed !

9.75km/l is 27.5 miles per UK gallon (about 23 per US gallon) so you should probably check the rest of your math

If that is pure around town driving you are about right. Those IST's being 1.3 and auto have to work pretty hard.

O.K well that is 10.25l/100km a little worse than I anticipated, but for heavy footed short trips with plenty of town running that doesn't really surprise me.

You have multiple things working against you with that car and that sort of running and they all add up. The lack of gears and old fashioned automatic sap about 30% of your economy straight away over most of the start stop and town running. Short trips mean a good proportion of your running is done on a rich uneconomical fuel/air mixture (like pulling the choke out in the old days). Cold oil and transmission fluid is thicker and creates more resistance. Plus the engine itself is quite old technology and not overly fuel efficient for its size. Other factors like old fashioned power steering (which saps engine power) the alternator working harder after starting and various other things add up too.

Its not worth changing now but I suggest you do your research better when it comes to updating the vehicle next time. There are similar priced options that are much more fuel efficient but realistically unless you are doing huge milage I don't think you could justify the cost and hassle of changing at this point.

You have my sympathy though, its hard to make a good decision when sites like the energywise one are so useless and car dealers only want to peddle inefficient old technology vehicles at you.

One thing I would suggest you do though is make sure that the vehicle has been properly serviced and bring things up to date if not. So many places want to sell you smoke and mirror nonsense instead of servicing your car these days I would not be surprised at all if things need attention. Dealers love to cut corners on servicing too.

Replacing air/fuel filters is a good start, plugs should be done and obviously keep up with oil and filter changes and use a quality oil. Giving the Maf sensor a clean wouldn't hurt (this is done with a special spray but is quick and eays to do) I would be looking in to whether a transmission service is due on that too, for peace of mind more than economy.

Be picky about where you get this done, you want a quality job but not a stupid price obviously.

Omen I have sold a LOT of the 1.3l and 1.5l toyota ists. Your fuel economy figure is not representative of the ist/echo/vitz/yarris.
There are a few reasons for bad fuel economy for the 1.3l VVTi engined toyota's The first being that the wrong oil has been used meaning the VVTI doesn't work properly.The second being as you say the car needs servicing.
The third being that the air filter needs to be replaced.
I wouldn't be using the high octane fuel at all in the Ist to be honest.
I'd STRONGLY recommend taking the car for a good drive. Get the engine good and hot for a lenth of time.

yea jazz is correct in a few things he has said. the later model corolla are much better on fuel, the lastest corolla launched yesterday has a CVT transmission which is the most economical trans. With the older cars the air filter needs to be clean, Don't zoome of at the lights and short running, stop start is where the fuel is used, You should be able to achieve down to 7/100 with your car, depennds alot on driving style. Goo luck.

With lots of short runs. I think you are VERY optimistic.
Feel free to re-measure and post how good you can get it after a service and driving carefully OP. I would be interested to see.

I guess with CVT transmissions having been mainstream for quarter of a century it is about time Toyota introduced one in the Corolla. That means it must only be another 16 years or so until we see one with a dual clutch automated manual.

Nope. they'll wait until they are reliable.Having witnessed the continual problems VW have with their version of a dual clutch transmission, (and,strangely, Honda quad bikes also) Toyota will wait until all the bugs are ironed out.After all, they have their reputation for reliability to uphold, unlike VW who have never been seen as reliable.

I have the car booked in tomorrow for service & tune-up where necessary. Will post another thread in a few weeks after I have run it a bit. Many thanks

CVT have been in Corolla since 2009 for NZ models. And Premio since 2004. So I wouldn't call it new to Toyota.

Ahh I stand corrected, so just the 22 years behind Fiat then (for the Corolla).

Yea thats better then 25 tho lol. And I haven't seen one with an issue yet touch wood.

Fiatsler lead at something nah but yeah those fuel figures are bad I get around 6L/100kms in town just cruising in 4th or 3rd but staying out of the turbo you can do that with a manual I can use 5th in town but 1250 rpm isnt good for instant pickup Highway milage can get down to 5L/100kms most of the time, But of course this is with an old diesel from the 80s not a fancy mega dollar fiatsler or dakdak motor or troublesome automatic slushbox.